As to the relevance of testimonials to the work of a scientific labora- 

 tory, he dismissed them entirely as unacceptable for scientific evidence: 



In general, the reports are made by noutrained observers, and the people who 

 supply svich information usually have no records or data to support, in a scientific 

 manner, the statements or claims they make. For that reason — first, that there 

 are generally no adequate measures included in a testimonial, no rigorous specifi- 

 cations of the operating conditions under which the measurements were taken, 

 and usually no controls whatever are used — for those reasons we cannot accept 

 testimonials as scientific evidence. *^^ 



Wlien the questioning turned to the role of NBS in the testing of 

 commercial products and the publication of information about findings 

 in such tests, Dr. Astin stressed the essential neutrality of a scientific 

 laboratory in this work: 



We try to confine oiu- reports merely to the presentation of technical data, and 

 we hope thereby that since it is straightforward data, nobody can complain that 

 they are being discriminated against. That is, I gave in my general statement the 

 example of tests on aluminum. It might show that tests on aluminum under a 

 particular set of conditions favor superior performance characteristics to steel. 

 Now would we withhold the dissemination of that data because the steel i)eople 

 would not like it? It is a cold, hard scientific fact. You disseminate it. To withhold 

 the dissemination of scientific information I think is the most prejudicial action. '^e 



He defended the practice of consulting with private industry as to 

 the subjects to be investigated by NBS: 



* * * We frequently attempt to determine the interest of sci(>ntific and manu- 

 facturing groups in publications before we distribute them. * * * And since 

 our act specifies that publications should be related to scientific and manufacturing 

 interests, we do make a serious eff"ort to determine the degree of interest in in- 

 formation of a particular type before dissemination.^^^ 



The infltience of the marketplace miglit generate interest iu a subject 

 to be investigated by NBS, but shoidd not be permitted to influence 

 tlie findings of a scientific investigation: 



* * * We are a scientific laboratory. We attempt to determine technical merits; 

 and use consideratioii, that is, whether a person is satisfied by the use of a product, 

 bears no consideration in influencing our findings. If, however, marketplace 

 factors create interest in a product, then that might determine whether or not we 

 would investigate it. But certainly the customer satisfaction or the demand for a 

 particular product in the market has no bearing whatsoever on the technical 

 merits of a product. '^^ 



The idtimate issue seemed to be the definition of the regidatory 

 role of a Government scientific laboratory. In response to qtiestions by 

 Senator Homer Ferguson, Dr. Astin sotight to reconcile the concept of 

 a neutral Government scientific institution insidated from the interests 

 and stresses of the marketplace ^nth the concept of a Government in- 

 stitution generating data in response to the needs of commerce. Senator 

 Ferguson asked such questions as: 



Do you believe that the Congress intended to grant authcrity to the Bureau of 

 Standards personnel to prepare material at the request of and for publication by 

 private organizations for commercial use? 



Do you think that the National Bureau of Standards by following its i)olicv 

 of disseminating technical data, when not specifically directed toward scientific 

 or technological progress, at the professional and production level, is broadening 

 gratuitousl' and, perhaps, inadvertentlv, into a regulatory activity? 



Dr. Astin responded that («) he was not sure that the Congress 

 intended the Bureau to channel its reports to comnKircial use by private 



